Comments on: Apple does its part to battle terrorism

By: Zach

Zach — Sun, 24 Oct 2010 22:34:10 +0000

I think that it is great that there is language that supports the fight against terrorism. No US company should support or allow terrorists to use their products for any reason. Kirkland Wa Homes For Sale

By: OPP – 2/16 (Abbey Road, Sasquatch, more) : EAR FARM :: music information helps grow ears

Tue, 16 Feb 2010 15:48:12 +0000

[...] does its part to battle [...]

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:49:12 +0000

Maddox pointed this out years ago.

http://www.thebestpageintheuniverse.net/c.cgi?u=macs_cant

By: Greg

Greg — Mon, 15 Feb 2010 20:47:41 +0000

Maddox pointed this out years ago

By: Bernd Felsche

Bernd Felsche — Sun, 14 Feb 2010 03:30:55 +0000

It’s all so obvious now!

Anybody without an iPod must be a terrorist!

By: Apple hace sus deberes en contra del terrorismo | NEU!

Apple hace sus deberes en contra del terrorismo | NEU! — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 06:59:40 +0000

[...] un poco de humor involuntario para terminar la semana. En Concurring Opinions destacan un párrafo muy interesante del contrato de Términos y Condiciones de [...]

By: Apple hace sus deberes en contra del terrorismo | La guarida del friki

Apple hace sus deberes en contra del terrorismo | La guarida del friki — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 06:46:45 +0000

[...] un poco de humor involuntario para terminar la semana. En Concurring Opinions destacan un párrafo muy interesante del contrato de Términos y Condiciones de [...]

By: Apple hace sus deberes en contra del terrorismo | WebRumbera Noticias

Apple hace sus deberes en contra del terrorismo | WebRumbera Noticias — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 03:21:13 +0000

[...] un poco de humor involuntario para terminar la semana. En Concurring Opinions destacan un párrafo muy interesante del contrato de Términos y Condiciones de iTunes: [...]

By: Apple hace sus deberes en contra del terrorismo | ALT1040

Apple hace sus deberes en contra del terrorismo | ALT1040 — Sat, 13 Feb 2010 00:30:28 +0000

[...] un poco de humor involuntario para terminar la semana. En Concurring Opinions destacan un párrafo muy interesante del contrato de Términos y Condiciones de [...]

By: Evan Carroll

Evan Carroll — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 15:51:37 +0000

If this is it, Apple has a far superior way to tackle this problem when compared to sourceforge.com: block huge swaths of land, like Iran and Syria. I’ll take an a disclaimer no one reads over the type of nuisance sourceforge is creating any day.

By: Security by hypocrisy - CNIS mag

Security by hypocrisy - CNIS mag — Fri, 12 Feb 2010 09:36:05 +0000

[...] entretenue et continue de figurer en première place des traditions Etats-Uniennes. Ainsi, remarque Concurring Opinions, cette clause de contrat que comporte la EULA d’iTune, et qui interdit aux terroristes localisés [...]

By: Los terroristas tienen prohibido usar iTunes

Los terroristas tienen prohibido usar iTunes — Thu, 11 Feb 2010 06:44:22 +0000

[...] Los terroristas tienen prohibido usar iTunes http://www.concurringopinions.com/archives/2010/02/apple-does-its-p…  por klam hace 2 segundos [...]

By: M

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 23:03:22 +0000

Might be a preemptive defense to not violating 18 USC 2339.

By: wemaflo.net » Apple fights terrorism – Die iTunes „Terms And Conditions“

Wed, 10 Feb 2010 21:19:10 +0000

[...] @annnalist, Schneier on Security, Concurring Opinons, iTunes Store Kommentare (0) Trackbacks (0) Einen Kommentar schreiben [...]

By: Bruce Boyden

Bruce Boyden — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 19:42:11 +0000

Nate, to my knowledge the provisions have never been tested. My vague recollection is that the export controls on encryption evolved to the point where any encryption in a mass consumer product received informal approval, without need for prior review from BXA. (I haven’t looked at this since at least 2005.) But I believe there were requirements that any strong encryption product subject to the export controls nevertheless contain some sort of contractual restriction barring re-export to certain countries (state sponsors of terrorism). So I believe the contract provisions were either required or at least were intended to serve the licensing process, not form some sort of basis for exclusion from liability.

A couple of things: I’ve never seen one of those clauses saying specifically you couldn’t use the product to build weapons. The concern was always that terrorists would use encryption to hide their plans. So maybe something else is at work here. Also, the encryption controls are (or were) administered by the Bureau of Export Administration in the Dept. of Commerce. But I’m seeing references to the Dept. of Treasury above. Perhaps there are money-laundering regulations that apply here too, although I’m not sure how Itunes would fall within those schemes, which I thought only applied to financial institutions.

By: James Grimmelmann

James Grimmelmann — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 19:09:01 +0000

The Department of Commerce's Bureau of Industry and Security regulates the export of cryptography. There were a series of First Amendment challenges to the regulations (Berstein v. U.S. and Junger v. Daley) in the 1990s, the result of which is that the government backed off the regulations such that posting material on the web isn't considered an illegal export. The BIS page is here.

By: Civ. Pro. King

Civ. Pro. King — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 14:42:44 +0000

These clauses are relatively old, but recently they might have been revised by many companies to reflect new social phenomena and change in State Dept./Treas. regs.

By: Tony

Tony — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 06:41:10 +0000

Public opinion and sentiments will always change as time goes on. Technology is no different in US’s export control. There was a time where stuff like this was legal: http://lawblog.legalmatch.com/2010/02/04/dont-copy-a-website-especially-if-it-belongs-to-a-law-firm/

By: Nate Oman

Nate Oman — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:25:19 +0000

Bruce: Interesting. Do you know if the ability of language like this to shield companies has ever been tested? If I understand you correctly the idea is to protect Apple from liability for exporting encryption technology. On the other hand, if I put the technology out there on the web for anyone to download, it seems a bit much to claim after the fact that I didn’t provide access to undesirable parties because of a clause in the boilerplate of the terms of service.

By: Bruce Boyden

Bruce Boyden — Wed, 10 Feb 2010 05:19:31 +0000

Several years ago, the last time I looked at this issue, language like this was inserted because encryption software was on the Dept. of Commerce’s Export Control list. That itself was an evolution from the time, 12 years ago or so, when encryption was treated as a munition and regulated by the State Department.